Breaking the chains, winning the games, and saving Western Civilization.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

A woman inquires about Game

EH sent a long email with a series of questions. Here are some of them:

It seems like being Alpha is different from Pick Up Artist culture. PUA, from what I understand, is about getting laid every night of the week. But it seems like Alpha Game is more of an entire lifestyle. How to attain the life you want. How to manage relationships with women, both long- and short-term. What women actually want and how to be that. But also, how to interact with men. I found your blog through your exchange with Dave Futrelle, after clicking through a few links on the "Confused Cats Against Feminism" tumblr. And it seems like you classify even that interaction with a man as an Alpha-Gamma interaction.

Am I right that it's much more of a lifestyle thing? If so, what are the characteristics of being an Alpha? Or can you point me to a few illuminating articles? I read the 16 Commandments of Poon. Can you give me a quick, couple-paragraph summary of the overall AG philosophy?

I think that a large part of it is that it's about not being/appearing weak. What exactly is weakness? Is kindness weakness? Is gentleness weakness? Or is it more that reticence and insecurity in your decisions and beliefs are weaknesses?

The interaction between Mr. Futrelle and I would be more precisely characterized as a Sigma-Gamma interaction, but close enough. PUA culture is merely one aspect of Game. Alpha Game is a broad spectrum series of observations, reflections, and random ideas concerning intersexual relations and how they impact society. Game is not a lifestyle thing, it is a philosophical heuristic.

The core philosophy of AG is that a man can learn successful patterns of behavior and improve his position in the socio-sexual hierarchy by observing and imitating the patterns of behavior exhibited by socially successful individuals.

Male success is heavily dependent upon not being or appearing weak. Weakness is the lack of strength, be it physical, mental, or moral. Kindness is not weakness, but it is often perceived as weakness by women. Gentleness is not weakness, but it is often perceives as weakness by women. Reticence may or may not be weakness. Insecurity is a weakness.

The gap between reality and the female perception of reality is one of the chief intersexual challenges with which every man must deal. It may seem unfair that the kind, gentle man cannot initially show his true nature to women he wishes to be attracted to his because they will have a strong tendency to reject him as weak, but the rules of attraction are what they are.

Just my take, and not a repudiation. I would think that a man will have a hard time imitating another man - rather we observe the (often) irrational choices and desires of today's woman (?!?) and allow the desired traits to flow in our personality. Normally, a kind and gentle man could not suffer those "dark triad" traits easily, but if that truly allows for a better marriage/LTR/ONS, then today's kind and gentle man will learn negs, going dark, aloofness and overt sexuality in order to place himself in the way of that crazy train.

It does not "seem unfair," it is unfair and that is what causes so much bitterness in today's beta. Marriage 2.0 requires both alpha and beta traits for long term success, so all men have to accept that long-term success will require the spurned moniker of "beta provider." By acknowledging those beta traits, we can see the absolute unfairness of being forced to adopt these traits that we would otherwise despise. It is unfair, illogical, and altogether draining to have to come up with a thought process whereby in order to have success in your marriage, you need to be the strange beast of alpha-beta-fu*-bux. This makes the bitterness shown by many beta providers understandable, but if you have been reading the manosphere for a while and have gained an understanding of female nature, then you will have to confess that the bitterness is another way to derail the crazy train - thereby destroying any progress a man would desire in his relationships.

That is refreshing, a woman who writes in and asks questions as opposed to blowing up the comments with accusations, assumptions, and indictments of badthink. The take-away for women who read here is that this is the appropriate way to gain understanding; Be honest that there are things you don't know and ask about them.

Normally, a kind and gentle man could not suffer those "dark triad" traits easily

When such a man encounters the red pill, at some point he comes up against this realization: it's usually more damaging to a relationship to put your woman on a pedestal and give her everything she says she wants -- the Churchian "good husband, servant leader, fill her love tank" script -- than to have her catch you balls-deep in your 18-year-old babysitter.

At that point, he basically has three choices:

1) Denial. Refuse to believe it, NAWALT, women are just being tricked by men, etc.2) Hate and/or mistrust women. Either cut them out of your life forever (some MGTOW) or just use them for sex and fun (some PUAs).3) Figure out what this means, how this knowledge fits into what you know of reality. Reconsider other assumptions it challenges. Reconcile this truth with Truth, if you're coming at things from a Christian viewpoint. Then decide how to live your life while taking this truth into account.

The third option is obviously the most difficult, but that's what sites like this one and Dalrock's are about: not just reacting to the information or using it for short-term gains, but using it to improve one's understanding of reality and ultimately of one's self.

I am convinced men who say only "crazy" women respond to negs/game have simply never tried to neg women, or tried and only uttered a direct insult to a woman.

For weeks, I had one young woman asking me to clarify what I meant when I said she was wearing a "mom shirt" one night. I have no idea what a mom shirt is. I was just messing around with a whole group of friends and said that to her in the midst of a riff. She's not "crazy train," just an average 25YO woman.

Another commenter displays a crippling misunderstanding of what a "neg" is, and what it's component parts are.

Negs are not "backhanded compliments", nor are they "insults". Although some women may categorize your neg as a backhanded compliment because they have been caught off guard by your torpedo that breached their defensive walls.

It's a compliment with a hook in it. Hamster fuel. Negs are usually the kind of thing that an alpha male will toss out in conversation without thought because he is self-confident and not at all intimidated by the girl. It is intriguing.

Been married for almost 23 years. While I think I am kind, I may have never been gentle. I was angry and it was a fight for 19 of those years until I found the sphere and I can tell you, even this late, everything CH, VD, and Dalrock talk about works - with the obvious exception of (for me) multiple girls. Negs and all and I swear my marriage has never been better. You can't make this stuff up and it is like having the most idiotic raindance actually work.

Funny how negs work. When my husband makes these kinds of comments, which he rarely does and rarity is part of the intrigue, I get all excited thinking he's been observing little old snowflake me. Anyone want to guess his response when I, heart aflutter, ask, "Oh, really? What do you mean?"

It's hard to disdain even PUAs. I would easily disdain them if they were bedding women by pretending to be nice or in love. Instead, they pretend to be detached jerks. What's a woman's complaint, "I found out he was only pretending to be a jerk"? "Boohoo he was nicer than I thought."

Regarding reality versus a woman's perception of reality: a man may actually be high value, but by acting kind and gentle, he is sending signals that will be perceived as low value. Game, at the very least, focuses behavior in ways that generate high value signals. Women are value shoppers; high value men are attractive, low value men are not. Women cannot help how they react to the signals they receive from men; they are made to respond submissively to dominant signals, and negatively to signals of weakness or insecurity.

Women want a man who “just gets it” without being told. What's more, they want a man who “just gets it” even when women are telling him to do the exact opposite (“I just want a nice guy, negs are so degrading”, etc). In other words, a man who knows when not to take women seriously.

A man who always takes what women say at face value shows his naivete and inexperience, which is of course a huge turn off for women. And yet women encourage this very thing, mostly to test for men who know better than to believe their BS concerning these matters.

It's hard to disdain even PUAs. I would easily disdain them if they were bedding women by pretending to be nice or in love. Instead, they pretend to be detached jerks. What's a woman's complaint, "I found out he was only pretending to be a jerk"? "Boohoo he was nicer than I thought."

It's amusing.

Ace comment, right here.

Women seem to prefer a man's actions to be more aloof than what his real feelings are, rather than more romantic than what his real feelings are.

The discrepancy between signals and reality is the justification for arranged marriage and family matchmaking. Dating is an anomaly. It is not two individuals coming together it is two families coming together. Parents and grandparents had strong influence deciding mates because they wanted their grandchildren to survive. It was a good idea then and it would be a good idea for the future.

FB,Well, the 25YO kept asking me what I meant by "mom shirt." She would bring it up every now and then for the next few weeks. I always said things like, "It looks like it wouldn't stain easily." At the time, we were eating. Still, that coment could've been taken two ways (i.e. Lewisnky sauce stain).

Or perhaps one has just failed miserably to understand the script and the whole nature of that servant/leader relationship.

I am well versed in the servant/leader relationship as well as how it is misrepresented in modern Christianity. The pedestal is very much a part of the modern understanding of this teaching. You are probably a feminist and don't even realize it. Most people in western societies are.

The response to a properly dropped neg is like someone described above: you capture much more of the attention of the woman than any other type of comment would engender. She may not come right out and ask baldly what you meant, but she will now engage in further conversation, testing, dancing around the subject, throwing out tests to see how you really feel about her, all while giving increase Indicators of Interest.

Unless you blow it by suddenly taking her seriously or trying to explain yourself.

Yes, if she says it with a smile and a warm face. It would show she's intelligent, however if she says it smarmy like, looking down her nose at you, steer clear.

It would/should catch a woman off guard. 10 more points if she just dropped a bunch of money on the cutest boots evah. The IOA would be her slapping your arm, "you're so mean...tee hee." - Even an intelligent woman will do that if the man in someone she's attracted to.

My dad's favorite to say was: "Do you still have to wear those after your feet get better?"

He's gotten slugged in the arm so many times for saying that. It is very hard for women to not be attracted to him and among other things, it's these types of negs that he delivers with perfect timing that just make women blush, and get all twitterpated around him. I even know it's coming and still give him the "ha, ha, you so funny..." And strange as it may sound, I walk away knowing we're good, he's awesome and still sharp - I hope the day never comes when he stops "being such a big jerk!" ;)

Well, that line is more clever than the "Are those your real nails? Well, they're nice anyway" thing over on Heartiste.Is the objective of a neg to confuse the target woman, thus giving you an opening to stab her in the heart... er...break out of whatever mental category she put you in when she first saw you?

you obviously haven't dropped a good neg on an attractive woman in the last 5 years.

I think that a large part of it is that it's about not being/appearing weak. What exactly is weakness? Is kindness weakness? Is gentleness weakness? Or is it more that reticence and insecurity in your decisions and beliefs are weaknesses?

One of the things that determines a man's position in the sociosexual hierarchy is how he responds to conflict or potential conflict.

Alphas don't shy away from conflict. They often enjoy it and sometimes seek it out. They usually win, and they want everyone to know it. One lower alpha I know will argue with a call center agent for an hour on the phone to get a penalty removed from his credit card bill, because he enjoys it. He brings that same taste for mild conflict into most of his interactions. He's very good at gentle ribbing (of women and everyone else).

Deltas tend to fear conflict, but they recognize that makes them less manly, and they still try to play their proper roles in the hierarchies of their work and friendships.

Gammas tend to fear conflict, and they think that makes them superior. They think that dodging conflict makes you a real man. They look up the social hierarchy and imagine they're looking down. They have a feminine mindset that distinguishes them from alphas/betas/deltas. It's not merely a matter of being lower on the hierarchy, but a matter of rejecting the masculine values of the hierarchy. Which is why they're so despised.

Sigmas, like alphas, have a taste for conflict, but they apply it more selectively and they're less likely to tell the world about it. They don't have the alpha's urge to reign visibly at the top of the social hierarchy; instead, they quietly amuse themselves by subverting social hierarchies and scoring hot chicks.

Which brings me to the question. Strength and weakness matter, but I think an acceptance of conflict or an aversion to conflict matter more. There is a big difference between fearing conflict and feeling capable of engaging but choosing not to. Sometimes women can tell the difference, and sometimes they can't. Women appreciate kindness and gentleness only after they've realized that you aren't afraid to be disagreeable.

I read your blog daily and I appreciate the clarifications/definitions. I would say I agree with 99% of your posts. I am a woman that wants a strong man that I can trust and count on to protect me and provide for me and love me. I on the other hand do all I can to help, support, nurture, love and respect him. We have been married 16 years and it works! Thanks for all you do.

Imagine, if you can, the mind of a woman, ebbing and flowing throughout each month towards and away from rational thought. It's not disputed that a woman wants to know if her husband/father thinks of her, considers her, likes her, approves of her etc. The way this desire is most satisfied is through her getting attention. It's easy to confuse negative attention (negs) as being mean or insulting. And it can be very difficult to understand that positive attention: direct words of praise and affirmation can actually make that mind of hers spin off course to that place where she doesn't feel good about the relationship anymore. Negs are playful attention that indeed send the message "I consider you, I think of you, I approve of you" but what they don't do is convey supplication or sappy affection. If you pay attention you'll hear it from women, "If my husband gushed about me all the time, 'you're so wonderful, you're my prize, I love everything about you, don't change a thing, you're perfect', I'd puke all over him...blech!" We know we're not perfect, we know we have a lot to change, we know we have weight to lose, muscles to build, nails to trim, a more gentle spirit to seek, wisdom to gain etc. So when a man gushes about us, he is either a.) lying or b.) pedestalyzing us. In either case, we subconsciously get the message that he is not the fittest he could be for our and our children's provision and protection. We respond very well when the man we love calls us out on our bullshit and playfully reminds us that we're not all that and a bag of chips. And, in essence that we need him and will continue to seek his attention. And our brain keeps spinning, does he think of me, consider me, does he like me? That a man takes the time to notice our shoes and ask if we must keep wearing them after our feet get better, answers the question: He does think of me, he's teasing me. If he truly didn't approve of me, he wouldn't tease me.

I'm the original sender of the email (EH). Not at all trolling here, I'm trying to understand this whole movement and hopefully write a thoughtful piece on it.

Can someone explain negging to me? It sounds like cutting a woman down and preying on her insecurities in order to manipulate her. Not that there's anything wrong with manipulation. We all manipulate people and things to get what we want. But preying on insecurities and making a woman feel bad seems particularly insidious.

Probably the greatest takeaway from game in the original post is the question about being/appearing weak.You could go with the fake it until you make it method (not appearing weak)...but as a Christian, I advocate the other side, - don't be weak. Self-examination, analysis of your weak points, being willing to acknowledge where you need work and then WORKING on it - those are the alpha traits.

This is where the gammas fail - they absolutely refuse to acknowledge they are weak in important areas.

This is where deltas fail - they may acknowledge that they're weak, but don't accept that they can change this about themselves, or are too lazy to make the effort to drive through the changes needed.

Omegas fail because they may know something is wrong, but are so socially miscalibrated that they really can't figure what their weaknesses are, so they have an almost impossible time of it.

Of course, the most effective way to make permanent changes in yourself is by submitting to God's will and allowing Him to team up with you to make the changes. There is nothing demeaning about accepting that the Creator of the universe knows more and is more powerful than you are, and allowing Him to be in charge.

Eliza, go to Chateau Heartiste and search his website on negging. His archives have excellent articles explaining it to those new to game.

I repeat that negging is not cutting down or insulting. It is a compliment with a hook, with just the right amount of ambiguity that stimulates the girl's interest. Women are uniquely vulnerable to it, they don't work on men (although girly men may susceptible)

Eliza, by the way, I have found that it is very, very difficult for almost all women to truly understand the neg.

Evopsych would say that women have evolved to be vulnerable to it and it is a survival trait to the species that they NOT be able to understand their vulnerability to alpha behavior. I am not a believer in evopsych.

I would say that God made men and women different, and only through God's wisdom could women be able to understand things like the neg, but it requires God-given courage and self-honesty to look into their own heart of darkness and see the way their own psyche resonates with the pickup techniques.

The red pill can be very bitter for men to swallow. I think it is 3x harder for women to swallow and digest. You may wish to settle for a partial understanding, which is gained by accepting a priori that these techniques have been field tested on 10s of thousands of women worldwide.

From Mystery: “A NEG is a qualifier. The girl is FAILING to meet your high expectations. Its not an insult, just a judgment call on your part. The better looking the girl, the more aggressive you must be with using negs."

Eliza, is a sword ethical? God gave the angel guarding the West entrance to the Garden of Eve one, the Word of God is described as a sword.Yet it can be and has been used for murder and rape. It has also defended the helpless.

How about training in martial arts? Ethical?

Hammers?

Game is a tool, and what makes it ethical is your usage of it.

Men are uniquely vulnerable to many things - beauty, nudity, seductive touching, flirting, flattery before asking for a favor ----- is it ethical? If my wife wears a dress that makes her look hot, is it ethical if it turns me on and makes me more amenable to her suggestions? How is this different from me using game to make our marriage better?

Ok. After reading the first article, I get the idea of it. It DOES sound like it's preying on her insecurities.

How do we feel about the ethics of this? I see it as kinda fucked up, whether it works or not. Because it seems like a basic abuser technique - cutting someone down to make them feel like they can't do better than you. But I'm curious to hear what you guys have to say.

It's the idea of negative reinforcement that bothers me. Men's vulnerabilities to seduction are not women making men feel bad, cutting them down. They're just giving them the stimulation they respond to. It is equally manipulative, yes, but seems much less negative, less predatory to women's insecurities.

Negs don't make women feel bad. Negs turn a woman's attention to the man who negged her. If a women says of a man, "he's driving me crazy, I can't get him off of my mind" she is in the early stages of high attraction towards that man. It's a bit different in marriage though not much. Most men are invisible to women. When a man can draw a woman's attention to him, he's broken through being invisible. When a man is still invisible to a woman, there is no compliment, or positive reinforcement that will elicit her attraction to him.

A well delivered neg is not an insult. If she responds with, "get a life, creep" he delivered an insult, not a neg. If she responds with, "whhaattt? Uh?" and her voice does a little crescendo, it was a well delivered neg and he's got her attention.

Good grief, it's teasing. It's fun. It's saying, "Yeah, you're hot, but I'm not overwhelmed like all these other guys, so pay attention." "Ethical" shouldn't even be part of the conversation, unless we're going to talk about whether it's "ethical" for a girl to toss her hair when she's talking to a guy.

Negs are only used on women with High sexual market value. Models, cheerleaders, strippers, etc.These types get so many compliments ALL THE TIME, from average men, that they subconsciously are waiting for some man to treat them like a normal human. A normal human gets teased, and doesn't get taken all that seriously in friendly conversations. Back to the teasing of the bratty sister analogy.

Less attractive women don't need negs, although so many men with no game have complimented uglier women so much that many of them DO need to be taken down a peg or two.

Who is preying on insecurities? Is is preying on a woman to open her up to a real conversation with a high quality self confident man who isn't dumbstruck by her beauty and engages her interest?

Save the shaming language for those who lie to women and fake commitment use the darkest of dread game.

Negs are perfectly ethical. There is nothing unethical about them. Neg is short for negative. You say negative things to a woman to assert your socio-sexual superiority to her, which women find attractive because they are hypergamous and respond positively to Displays of High Value. Most men say positive things to women. Most women ignore men who do that.

By the way, that's why negging is best saved for hot chicks and used sparingly. The idea isn't to bash an already shaky psyche or make anyone cry. If it were about "preying on insecurities" and cutting her down so she won't expect much, you'd want to pile on the negs until she's a bawling mess begging you to use her. That's not it at all. It's to get her attention and cut through the bitch shield that a hot chick erects to protect her from all the boring compliments and supplication she gets bombarded with.

"It may seem unfair that the kind, gentle man cannot initially show his true nature to women he wishes to be attracted to his because they will have a strong tendency to reject him as weak, but the rules of attraction are what they are."

That was my take for a long time, but now I think as long as you've developed masculine habits of mind and action, you can be as kind as you want.

Kind, not nice.

Nice is submissive. It doesn't help a gamma to tell them to hide their niceness for awhile, then let it out once she shows some IOI's.

Kindness is more bold, pro-active = your woman is feeling down -> "mmm, I feel like some ice cream", head out expecting her to follow. There's even time where ignoring her is the kind thing to do.

Eliza, I'm another lady, so I'll give your question a shot and see if this is just a situation of men-from-mars/women-from-venus miscommunication. Hopefully, I understand well enough to do so!

A lot of ladies' initial problem with the neg is that it sounds, well "negative." But really all the neg is (generally) is a bit of playful teasing. Like the example of, "Nice boots - my grandma has a pair like them," it is usually not quite a compliment, not really insulting, but just something that might be a little confusing or make you laugh. ("Mom shirt" is also great, since it's so opaque - is it good? Is it bad? Probably neither, but gosh, what does it MEAN?)

In some cases, a more direct (potentially harsher) neg may be used with girls who have an unwarranted high opinion of themselves to bring them back down to reality, but my understanding has been that this is not the general usage on sites like AG and Dalrock - I couldn't speak to the trends on CH and other PUA sites. I think I recall Rollo at the Rational Male suggesting that a good way to neg was just to treat the girl in question as you might your cute-but-bratty little sister. It's not mean, it's just a little playful messing with.

The effectiveness of the neg, as I understand it, is two-fold: the man is showing the girl/woman in question that he is neither intimidated by her, nor so struck by her magnificence that he can't behave normally to her. Second, it gives her something to "figure out" and helps her drop her guard enough to open up and engage.

As to your comments about vulnerability, I don't see how preying on a man's vulnerability to sex (or the lure of sex) is less predatory than a little negging. Again, my understanding of neg is that it is generally mostly teasing, not destroying a woman's self-esteem.

And on a tangent, if a woman's self-esteem is SO FRAGILE that a PUA armed with a couple negs can torpedo it and have his way with her, MAYBE, just MAYBE she should either: base her self-worth in something more meaningful than whatever she's using now, OR return to the protection of her father. BUT that's a WHOLE 'NOTHER can o' worms.

"3) Figure out what this means, how this knowledge fits into what you know of reality. Reconsider other assumptions it challenges. Reconcile this truth with Truth, if you're coming at things from a Christian viewpoint. Then decide how to live your life while taking this truth into account.

The third option is obviously the most difficult, but that's what sites like this one and Dalrock's are about: not just reacting to the information or using it for short-term gains, but using it to improve one's understanding of reality and ultimately of one's self."

Given that (3) is consistent with what the Bible, great literature, and traditional upbringing already taught, I'm missing the difficulty. If anything, it should come as a great relief.

The other thing about the neg is if you spend much time in the company of men, you'll notice that we're usually giving each other far more severe shit than any woman will ever suffer. A man who's not familiar with that is a man who hasn't spent much time in the company of men, and is thus of very low status.

Desiderius makes an excellent point. Hell, when I met my husband, he referred to (and sometimes still does) his best friend as his "rival" and they say things to each other that are FAR more hateful sounding than any neg would ever be said to a girl. Yet I know that they love each other in that manly way men have, that they are solid as a rock, and half the things they say are meant to motivate and encourage each other - just, not in a way any woman would want to be motivated. :P

Example: at the gym, doing dead-lifts, "Pick it UP, you PUSSY! Make up your mind!" Men encouraging men. I love it. XD

The other thing about the neg is if you spend much time in the company of men, you'll notice that we're usually giving each other far more severe shit than any woman will ever suffer. A man who's not familiar with that is a man who hasn't spent much time in the company of men, and is thus of very low status.

That's something women sense.

What Captain Obvious here is trying to explain is that men talk shit to one another.

So, it's like, she wants to be pushed to strive for you? She wants to work a little bit?

Yes, women want this. Many men here are just starting to learn this. The epidemic of obese wives is a result of men believing the lies they were told about marital equality (as opposed to Truth - submission/headship). Women, though they will say they want their man to "love them for who they are" truly do want to be married to a man who has standards. When the husband acquiesces and treats her nice (which does not mean kind) and equal and does his chores and supports her career and becomes her helpmeet, she has achieved an equal marriage but is horribly unhappy, unstimulated, bored, and often on her way to taking multiple SSRI's and obesity - it is also very unlikely they are still having sex.

Observe women who are in new relationships, watch the bounce in their step, the joy they have, the smiles and exhilaration. Pay attention to how she's caring for herself. Hair done, makeup done, nails done, nice clothes, etc. She gossips less, complains less, is not depressed, she covets nothing, life is exciting and beautiful. She's working to keep him. And she's very happy doing it.

Though new love like that is primarily Eros, this is what I've observed of women who are in marriages modeled after biblical instruction. There is little that is more awesome to see than a couple who have been married for 50+ years still hot for each other. And those I've seen have a lot of laughter in their marriage, he teases her, negs her, she can't get enough of him and can not even contemplate not considering his every need - she still strives for him, and is very happy doing so. It's almost as if it was designed to be this way.

The epidemic of obese wives is a result of men believing the lies they were told about marital equality (as opposed to Truth - submission/headship). Women, though they will say they want their man to "love them for who they are" truly do want to be married to a man who has standards. When the husband acquiesces and treats her nice (which does not mean kind) and equal and does his chores and supports her career and becomes her helpmeet, she has achieved an equal marriage but is horribly unhappy, unstimulated, bored, and often on her way to taking multiple SSRI's and obesity - it is also very unlikely they are still having sex.

This is a nearly textbook description of Marriage 2.0, i.e., marriage as an equal partnership, as opposed to the wife being submissive to the husband as in traditional marriage.

Thanks, guys. I think I understand - the concept of the "neg" as a teasing, disarming thing, not a truly adversarial put-down. I can see how that could be attractive to women, showing that the man isn't intimidated, but also that he has the capacity to be silly - which I would certainly find attractive.

"The gap between reality and the female perception of reality is one of the chief intersexual challenges..."

The different perceptions of negs depending on gender, demonstrates one of the problems with men believing they define reality. Negs are a very pleasant and delightful dance between men and women, so why would anybody refer to them as unkind or not positive? The fact that you even call them "negatives" surprises me.

The next question then: what differentiates an effective neg from an insulting one.

"Your boots remind me of my grandmother's boots. They're very stylish." vs. "Do you still have to wear those after your feet get better?"

I can't imagine that these are equally effective.

The former neg implies that the target is old-fashioned and not sexually attractive, which makes the "very stylish" comment seem like an weak and insincere sop to the target's ego - a supplicating "I know I've just insulted you, but don't hurt me" gesture. Same deal with the "Are those your real nails? Well, they're nice anyway". Catty and effeminate, and an insult to both target and targeter.

The latter implies that the target's shoes are terrible and that the only reason she would wear something that unflattering is if she had a medical problem. It shows that the targeter thinks the target isn't living up to her potential, which makes it a playful challenge to her to meet his expectations. It doesn't disguise the targeter's opinion, but it doesn't require the target to defend her clothing choice the way a sarcastic "Nice shoes, did you get them on consignment?" would.

Feather Blade, you've just demonstrated why negs work so well. You managed to spend a few paragraphs analyzing an offhand comment about boots that barely made sense in the first place. Now imagine that happening to a girl who's been standing around bored at a party while boring guys fetched her boring drinks and gave her boring compliments. It doesn't matter what she thinks he might mean by it; it only matters that she's thinking about him in a way that separates him from the crowd of supplicants.

Personally, I'd stay away from any "prepared" negs, because it's too easy for them to sound try-hard if they don't fit the situation. Better to internalize the Bratty Little Sister Frame, and let the teasing flow naturally. But guys have to start somewhere, and having a few lines prepared can help.

The next question then: what differentiates an effective neg from an insulting one.

The most effective neg pertains to her best feature that is not one of long term worth (you don't neg a woman's loyalty, faithfulness, long suffering). Rather, what she spends time to improve and knows is physically attractive, maybe trendy or enviable but not of sustaining value. For example, I'm a bit OCD about landscaping and gardening. My in-laws are all neggers. The women to each other, the men to the women, no one escapes the neg in this family. Needless to say, all negs towards me have to do with my gardens.

Upon just meeting a woman, it's pretty easy to tell what she spends her time/money on. That's what you neg. Beautiful, long silky black hair - "Hey, Morticia..."

Imagine a man who has so much top-shelf pussy thrown at him that he's literally never hungry; he truly doesn't care whether any particular woman is attracted to him, because there's always a better one around the corner who is attracted. He has never in his life felt any need whatsoever to accommodate women in any way. He is 100% secure.

Now, imagine things that guy might say to a hot woman that ordinary guys would never say. Not things intended to hurt, but not things intended to suck up either. Those are negs.

Examples: he might tell her what he really honestly thinks of her clothes, speech, behavior. He might suggest how she could dress better. He might ask if her hair or nails are real. He might compare her shoes with his grandmother's shoes. He will say all these things with a straight face. In the right circumstances, even a burp can be a neg.

Negging and teasing are not the same. When you tease, it's understood that you're just teasing her. When you neg, you play it straight, as if you are unaware that she might interpret what you say as an insult. For best results, it helps to actually be unaware, like our imaginary 100% secure guy. Negging is more effective than teasing with the hottest women (8 and up), because they really don't know if you're negging them on purpose or simply not affected by their attractiveness. Teasing is safer for 7's, whose egos might not withstand an actual neg.

@Feather Blade: "Your boots remind me of my grandmother's boots. They're very stylish." implies that the target is old-fashioned and not sexually attractive, which makes the "very stylish" comment seem like an weak and insincere sop to the target's ego - a supplicating "I know I've just insulted you, but don't hurt me" gesture. If that's the case, you've delivered it wrong. It's crucial to appear as if you are not aware that the comment could be taken as an insult. The correct delivery is the delivery of our imaginary 100% secure guy if he actually had a really stylish grandmother and said it with sincerity.

"Are those your real nails? Well, they're nice anyway". Catty and effeminate. Again, only if you're dumb enough to signal the fact that you know it might be taken as an insult. The correct delivery is the delivery of our 100% secure guy who simply says what he sincerely thinks without first bothering to notice whether it might be interpreted as an insult.

Negs are perfectly ethical. There is nothing unethical about them. Neg is short for negative. You say negative things to a woman to assert your socio-sexual superiority to her, which women find attractive because they are hypergamous and respond positively to Displays of High Value. Most men say positive things to women. Most women ignore men who do that.

There's a straightforward answer.

And there lies the answer as to why it works so well on high-value women.

"Nah, she always hated those boots. Said they made her calves look fat."

Bob, what is it that men want women to "just get"?

Naked, mostly.

Which what both have in common is a man's willingness to speak his mind (even if he may be partially fabricating the idea to be just a little outrageous). Not fearing the consequences of saying the wrong thing is a DHV.

And I think that gets at the secret of when "kind" is and isn't okay. Kindness from a position of strength is a DHV. "I have so much, I can easily share some with this person" But kindness from a position of weakness is more likely to look like supplication. "I fear this person, so I will attempt to appease them in the hopes they won't squash me like a bug."

Let me write my opinion here and go beyond all tips laid out here, you, me, and all males are how they are because of the brain chemistry and personality. This is a a fact that people need to capture, understand and wake up and say, hey its actually true. You can give advice to men, in all matters of life, but how they receive that advice and act upon it or try to act upon it is another $100.

I sometimes see these guys who are pretty confident giving out tips to men that are actually much better looking then them, but because of the brain chemistry, they are shy by nature and therefore, portrays lake of confidents, which turn of most women.

So to end my comment, advice and tips are great, but this is more complex then that and has a link to our brain and chemical imbalance or lack of, it that individual is healthy. What may seem easy to some male to look confident or approach a women, is very hard to another, no mother how they look because of chemical imbalances in the brain, if there is such a condition in that individual, which makes life very hard on them.

Some conditions (for example), can make a man prawn to be highly anxious while others are healthy and don't have this issue, therefore, one needs to understand other person when its hard for them to accomplish or listen to the tips or advice given in any aspect of life.

"Negging and teasing are not the same. When you tease, it's understood that you're just teasing her. When you neg, you play it straight, as if you are unaware that she might interpret what you say as an insult. For best results, it helps to actually be unaware, like our imaginary 100% secure guy."

That's a useful distinction. It really gets to the jist of the whole thing, which is the frame of mind that women sense, and why its attractive to them. It indicates comfort around, thus experience with, high value women. Sexy son hypothesis.

okay, example of a recent accidental neg:Attractive girl is getting a dish at potluck that is pretty garlicky....I toss this comment into the flow of conversation."I've noticed that the hotter girls seem more willing to eat the stinkier foods."\

Boom! I've both implied that she is hotter, but that it is likely that her breath or body odor is stinky.

Her eyes lit up, you could tell that no one all day had done anything except fluff her up. Can she be offended? No. I implied that she was hot, but didn't do it directly because I didn't say that SHE was hot. Nor did I directly say that she had stinky breath. But......I was the first person to challenge her and she thoroughly enjoyed our next 5 minutes of conversation, even coming to sit with my family to continue to fun.

A female coworker was regaling us about how she successfully handled a sale earlier that day. Everyones saying their congrats and whatnot, I reply with, "Wow, youre more clever than anyone ever thought!"

She pauses for a split second then bursts out laughing and says, "I hate you!"